VOL.

137, JULY 5, 1985

341
Natl. Union of Garments Textile
Cordage and General Workers of
the Phils. (GATCORD) vs. Ministry
of Labor
No. L-50336. July 5, 1985.
NATIONAL UNION OF GARMENT TEXTILE CORDAGE AND GENERAL
WORKERS OF THE PHILIPPINES (GATCORD), petitioner, vs. MINISTRY OF
LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS, GELMART INDUSTRIES, INC.,
BAGONG PILIPINO GELMART WORKERS UNION, NATIONAL FEDERATION
OF LABOR UNIONS (NAFLU), FEDERATION OF FREE WORKERS (FFW), AND
TRADE UNIONS OF THE PHILIPPINES AND ALLIED SERVICES (TUPAS),
respondents.
*

Labor Law; Certification Elections;Where a union had already been certified as the
exclusive bargaining agent in the certification election held, the petition questioning the
inclusion of the union in the election becomes moot; Rule that moot questions will not be
determined by the court.In the light of the foregoing circumstances, the instant petition
will no longer serve any useful purpose as respondent BPGWU had already been certified
by the Bureau of Labor Relations as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent in the
certification election held wayback on May 10, 1979. It is a settled rule that a court will not
determine moot questions or abstract proposition, nor express an opinion in a case in which
no practical relief can be granted.
________________
*

SECOND DIVISION.

342

342

SUPREME COURT
REPORTS ANNOTATED
Natl. Union of Garments Textile
Cordage and General Workers of
the Phils. (GATCORD) vs. Ministry
of Labor

PETITION to review the decision of the Bureau of Labor Relations.

The facts are stated in the resolution of the Court.
Israel Bocobo for petitioner.
Olalia, Dimapilis, Olalia & Associates for respondent NAFLU.

Jaime D. Lauron for respondent FFW.

RESOLUTION
CUEVAS, J.:
Alleging that respondent Bureau of Labor Relations, Ministry of Labor, acted
without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack of jurisdiction in issuing its Resolution dated February 16, 1979 in BLR Case
No. A-1347-79(1), which denied the appeal of petitioner National Union of Garment,
Textile Cordage & General Workers of the Philippines (GATCORD) from the
Resolution of Med-Arbiter Atty. Edgardo de la Cruz directing the holding of a
certification election, petitioner filed on April 10, 1979 the instant petition for
Certiorari with Preliminary Injunction praying that the Resolution of respondent
Bureau of Labor dated February 16, 1979 as well as its Resolution dated March 14,
1979 denying petitioners motion for reconsideration, be declared null and void and
that pending resolution of this petition on the merits, a writ of preliminary
injunction be immediately issued enjoining respondent Bureau of Labor Relations
from implementing the aforementioned assailed Resolutions.
The following are the pertinent background facts.
1

_______________
1

Annex H, Petition, pp. 51-55, Rollo.

Annex G, Petition, pp. 40-50, Rollo.

Annex E, Petition, pp. 31-36, Rollo.

Pp. 2-7, Rollo.

Annex J-1, Petition, pp. 61-62, Rollo.

343

VOL. 137, JULY 5, 1985

343
Natl. Union of Garments Textile
Cordage and General Workers of
the Phils. (GATCORD) vs. Ministry
of Labor
On October 15, 1978, the tank and file workers of respondent Gelmart Industries
(Phils.) Inc. disaffiliated and withdrew their membership from petitioner National
Union of Garment Textile Cordage & General Workers of the Philippines
(GATCORD), heretofore referred to as petitioner union, and organized Bagong
Pilipino Gelmart Workers (respondent BPGWU, for short). Subsequently, BPGWU

applied for registration as a labor union with the Ministry of Labor and was
correspondingly issued a certificate of registration on October 24, 1978.
On December 6, 1978, respondent Trade Unions of the Philippines and Allied
Services (respondent TUPAS, for short), filed a petition for certification election to
determine the sole and exclusive bargaining representative of the regular workers in
the rank and file unit of Gelmart Industries, Inc., hereinafter referred to as
respondent company.
On December 13, 1979, petitioner union filed a complaint for unfair labor practice
(for company domination) against respondent BPGWU and respondent company
with the Ministry of Labor, which was docketed as R4-LRD-M-12-577-78(AB-2-79579).
On December 19, 1979, respondent BPGWU filed a petition for direct certification
with the Ministry of Labor which was later on treated by respondent Bureau of
Labor Relations as an intervention in the TUPAS petition earlier filed.
Respondent National Federation of Labor Union (NAFLU, for short) filed a
motion for intervention on December 27, 1978.
On January 11, 1979, Med-Arbiter Edgardo de la Cruz of Regional Office No. IV,
Ministry of Labor issued a Resolution in Case No. R4-LRD-M-12-564-78, the
dispositive portion of which reads
6

________________
6

Case No. R4-LRD-M-12-564-78.

Case No. R4-LRD-12-584-78.

Annex C, Petition, pp. 18-19, Rollo.

Annex E, Petition, pp. 24-26, Rollo.

344

344

SUPREME COURT
REPORTS ANNOTATED
Natl. Union of Garments Textile
Cordage and General Workers of
the Phils. (GATCORD) vs. Ministry
of Labor

WHEREFORE, a certification election is hereby ordered within 20 days from receipt of this
resolution by the parties. A pre-election conference is to be held in this office to thresh out
the mechanics of the election. The contending parties are
1. 1.Trade Union of the Philippines and Allied Workers (TUPAS)

2. 2.National Union of Garment, Textile, Cordage and Allied Workers of the Philippines
(GATCORD)
3. 3.Bagong Pilipino Gelmart Workers Union (BPGWU)
4. 4.National Federation of Labor Union (NAFLU)
5. 5.No union.
SO ORDERED.

On January 20, 1979 the Federation of Free Workers (FFW) filed an Urgent Motion
for Intervention praying that it be included as a participating union in the
certification election.
Petitioner union appealed from the said Resolution of Med-Arbiter de la Cruz
dated January 11, 1979, objecting to the inclusion of respondent BPGWU as one of
the contending parties in the ordered certification election because of the pending
case for unfair labor practice.
On February 16, 1979, respondent Bureau of Labor Relations issued its now
assailed Resolution denying the appeal of petitioner union and ordering the
inclusion of respondent FFW as additional contending union in the certification
election.
Petitioner unions motion for reconsideration having been denied, it now come to
Us thru the instant petition with prayers as herein earlier stated.
The instant petition is predicated on the alleged unfair labor practice charge filed
against respondent company and respondent BPGWU for being a company
dominated union. Petitioner objected to the holding of a certification election Until
and after respondent BPGWU shall have been cleared of the unfair labor practice
charge arguing that such charge of com10

11

________________
10

Annex F, Petition, pp. 37-39, Rollo.

11

Annex G, Petition, pp. 40-50, Rollo.

345

VOL. 137, JULY 5, 1985

345
Natl. Union of Garments Textile
Cordage and General Workers of
the Phils. (GATCORD) vs. Ministry
of Labor

pany domination is a prejudicial question that until decided shall suspend or bar
proceedings for certification election.
The issue has now become moot and academic. The records show that the unfair
labor practice charge against respondent BPGWU and respondent company had
already been dismissed, as per the decision of Labor Arbiter Ernilo V. Pealosa
dated April 25, 1979. Petitioner union did not appeal from the said decision.
Consequently, the same is now final.
On the matter of the certification election sought to be stopped or prevented thru
the petition at bar, the records likewise disclosed that said certification election is
now a fait accompli. It was held on May 10, 1979 and respondent BPGWU garnered
a great majority of the valid votes cast by the regular rank and file workers.
Conformably, in the order dated May 16, 1979 issued by Med-Arbiter Edgardo de la
Cruz, respondent BPGWU has been certified as the sole and exclusive bargaining
agent of all the regular rank and file workers of respondent company. In fact on
December 13, 1979, respondent BPGWU and respondent company signed a 3-year
Collective Bargaining Agreement which expired on December 31, 1982.
In the light of the foregoing circumstances, the instant petition will no longer
serve any useful purpose as respondent BPGWU had already been certified by the
Bureau of Labor Relations as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent in the
certification election held wayback on May 10, 1979. It is a settled rule that a court
will not determine moot questions or abstract proposition, nor express an opinion in
a case in which no practical relief can be granted.
12

13

14

15

________________
12

Annex A of respondent BPGWUs Comment to the Petition dated May 31, 1979.

13

Annex A to respondent BPGWUs Supplemental Comment and/or Manifestation and Motion dated

February 23, 1980.

14

Annex B of respondent BPGWUs Supplemental Comment and/or Manifestation and Motion dated

February 23, 1980.

15

Emilio Bongat, et al. vs. Bureau of Labor Relations, et al., G.R. No. 41039, April 30, 1985.

346

34
SUPREME COURT
6
REPORTS ANNOTATED
United CMC Textile Workers Union
vs. Clave
WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DISMISSED for being moot and academic. No
costs.
SO ORDERED.

Makasiar, Concepcion, Jr.,Abad Santos and Escolin, JJ., concur.

Aquino, J., in the result.
Petition dismissed.
Notes.It is the constitutional right of every employee to choose their own labor
union. (George & Peter Lines, Inc. vs. Associated Labor Union, 134 SCRA 82.)
The remedy against erring union officers is not referendum but union expulsion.
(Kapisanan ng Manggagawang Pinagyakap vs. Trajano, 134 SCRA 236.)
Loss of confidence in a managerial employee is not present where he was later
promoted. (General Bank & Trust Co. vs. Court of Appeals, 135 SCRA 569.)
o0o